BioWare - Laidlaw on the next Dragon Age game

Doll house game features. You can dress your character. No game content attached to it. At least, in the Sims, choosing colour, a certain outfit visual, have ingame consequences.

Typically the kind of aesthetics content that should come as a DLC.

Originally Posted by elikal
For me it is more the disaster of ME3, than DA2. In both games, the "hero" was not making ANY change in the result of the end. In ME3 and DA2, the player was just a witness of things. His influence on the result was, a few details, zilch. I profoundly hated that. In a RPG I want to feel my heroic or villainous actions made a difference.

The exceptional character syndrome. Actually, it is what gave a game like ME3. The no impact endings are the result of the game being a series as developpment costs to cope with mattering decisions would skyrocket beyond what can be born.

Originally Posted by ChienAboyeur
Doll house game features. You can dress your character. No game content attached to it. At least, in the Sims, choosing colour, a certain outfit visual, have ingame consequences.

Typically the kind of aesthetics content that should come as a DLC.

The exceptional character syndrome. Actually, it is what gave a game like ME3. The no impact endings are the result of the game being a series as developpment costs to cope with mattering decisions would skyrocket beyond what can be born.

BS. In KOTOR you have a good and an evil ending. In Fallout 1, 2 and 3 you had various endings. Even in DA:O you had serveral ending which refer to who you are and what you did. You just have to WANT to add that. Even if there is only one ending, you have to FEEL it matters. Like in Baldurs Gate. The bad thin in Dragon Age 2 was that Hawk was a mere spectator, more often just a victim of things. It wasn't even pretended his actions mattered in ANY case. In every single storyline, the events rolled over him and he was merely a witness. In ME3 you get a complete deus-ex-machina ending with a char who appears in the last 5 minutes for the first time. NOTHING you did as Shepard mattered a single bit! Thats just bullshit.

Originally Posted by elikal
BS. In KOTOR you have a good and an evil ending. In Fallout 1, 2 and 3 you had various endings. Even in DA:O you had serveral ending which refer to who you are and what you did. You just have to WANT to add that. Even if there is only one ending, you have to FEEL it matters. Like in Baldurs Gate. The bad thin in Dragon Age 2 was that Hawk was a mere spectator, more often just a victim of things. It wasn't even pretended his actions mattered in ANY case. In every single storyline, the events rolled over him and he was merely a witness. In ME3 you get a complete deus-ex-machina ending with a char who appears in the last 5 minutes for the first time. NOTHING you did as Shepard mattered a single bit! Thats just bullshit.

Fallout 3 was the followup to fallout 2?

Already explained in another thread.

Building up a series like ME or DA is not possible.

The first episode brings two fundamentally different endings (what is required to feel special, to feel that you, the player who wants to play an exceptional character, is the center of the universe), the second episode which is a direct continuation of the first episode, has to provide two fundamentally different versions else your choices do not matter. And it has to end with four fundamentally different endings.
The third episode then has to come in four fundamentally different versions.

Etc… Not sustainable.

Was easy to figure out before playing ME3. The ending had to be tasteless. Especially since Bioware looks like wanting to exploit more ME universe franchise.

In the games like BG, you got vague references to previous installments in the series. Nothing capital. Nothing like the continuity you could have expected from playing an hero dedicated arc.

Originally Posted by staylost
Yup, Canadian's hate French, except for those in Quebec. So if the game is made in Edmonton, the French will be the loud smelly bad guys. If the game is made in Montreal, the French will be the artsy tough freedom fighters.

Cool, I did not know that! In that case, I am always looking forward to add new prejudices to my old ones. Or prejudices about prejudices.

Truth be told, I am still dubious about the location. Existing lore about Orlais, even if Ferelden biased, just does not sound particularly interesting to me. Too many references to existing countries and - both good and bad - clichés about them make it predictable and boring to me.

Originally Posted by Dhruin
The problem is that Bioware hasn't figured out what to do with the IP. DAO worked quite well on PC but the tactical aspects were difficult to control on console. They can't leave it as a PC-first product but they haven't figured out what will work with both camps.

They could, of course, have two different approaches but Bioware hates not doing the most "efficient" thing when it comes to develoment.

Actually the real problem is that DAO took like 5-6 years to make… That kind of scope you will never, ever see again from an EA-controlled company which demands megahits every other year from its minions. Corners simply have to be cut to maintain that schedule, and they were quite apparent in DA2. OR, you hire more people to work on it, but that affects the bottom line, so it's off the table. EA wants game-producing sweat shops throwing quick, lower-quality product together to maximize profits.

Originally Posted by Dhruin
The problem is that Bioware hasn't figured out what to do with the IP. DAO worked quite well on PC but the tactical aspects were difficult to control on console. They can't leave it as a PC-first product but they haven't figured out what will work with both camps.

They could, of course, have two different approaches but Bioware hates not doing the most "efficient" thing when it comes to develoment.

This is one of the things that people seem to forget about DA:O. One of the bigger complaints about that game was the fact that the console versions had awkward controls. Its my guess that those complaints led to the more action-based focus of Dragon Age 2. Combat that is designed for a controller works on all platforms. Combat designed first and foremost for mouse and keyboard does not translate well to consoles. Games with a lot of tactics or RTS components really need to precision of a mouse; doing those actions using an analog stick would not be fun.

So far, they're trying to find a happy medium, but have not yet been successful.

Also, to be fair, the efficiency issue could be extended to most devs these days, at least any creating multiplat games. Off the top of my head I can't even think of many recent games that went out of their way to make the PC experience unique from the consoles.

Originally Posted by darkling
The first time it happens is before you reach the gnolls. You fight a random encounter of gnolls, think it's done, skeletons pop out of the ground. That repeats a few times.

Waves.

Baldur's Gate had some ambushes, but not constant waves where enemies appear out of nothing. It's not even comparable.

Originally Posted by JDR13
Baldur's Gate had some ambushes, but not constant waves where enemies appear out of nothing. It's not even comparable.

DA2 did seem to take that mechanic to the extreme. Personally I wouldn't mind the waves if used sparingly, like during a boss battle or an occasional ambush. But having them for every battle did get very tiresome.

I heard that the DLC showed a step in the right direction regarding the use (or elimination) or waves in combat. Can anyone confirm? I didn't play anything past the main game.

This guy just doesn't get it.How they devised the game to be spiritual successor to BG but map placement is actually removed is beyond me.And then the game having silly rules just killed it for me.Wanna make a great game then get back the D&D license and use its yrs of "rules" that have been time tested in basements thuout the world for decades.Think TOEE here with amazing 3D graphics,great story line,great music,amazing paper dolls etc and your right on track.Sadly he just doesn't get it.I think they need to get the two main guys of zBioware to do this and it will succeed………

Originally Posted by wolfen
This guy just doesn't get it.How they devised the game to be spiritual successor to BG but map placement is actually removed is beyond me.And then the game having silly rules just killed it for me.Wanna make a great game then get back the D&D license and use its yrs of "rules" that have been time tested in basements thuout the world for decades.Think TOEE here with amazing 3D graphics,great story line,great music,amazing paper dolls etc and your right on track.Sadly he just doesn't get it.I think they need to get the two main guys of zBioware to do this and it will succeed………

It's not so much that they don't get it. Given that consoles make a large chunk of their sales, they need to keep that audience in mind as well, and action-based combat plays better there. Sad but true, so I doubt you'll be seeing any more games from Bioware that reflect their style from back when they were a PC dominant developer.

On the plus side, the indie scene seems to be filling the void nicely. I've been impressed with some of the old-school types games coming out, hopefully the trend will continue. I'd love to see more games like Grimrock, that take an classic RPG gameplay style and give it a fresh coat of paint. Or Baldurs Gate/TOEE for that matter. (Never played TOEE, but looks interesting based on the listing on GoG)

Originally Posted by dpc76
It's not so much that they don't get it. Given that consoles make a large chunk of their sales, they need to keep that audience in mind as well, and action-based combat plays better there. Sad but true, so I doubt you'll be seeing any more games from Bioware that reflect their style from back when they were a PC dominant developer.

And that is why the older fans like me hate there new style. Look at any other pc orientated company out there they all abandoned what they once were to embrace the console market.

Nothing wrong with it but people like me just don't like there direction there going. Apparently though a few thousand lost sales is nothing to them when new fans salivate over every game they make.

Knowing that the fans nowadays will face the same problem 10 years from now make me giggle with glee. They can one day be ridiculed by the masses for once and told they don't get it. It's a cycle that repeats itself.

— RPGWatchSenior News Editor & Moderator

"I Am a Proud BioWare Fanboy, and Have Been One for Fifteen Years."Paypal Donation Link - If you like my work please donate.

Originally Posted by ChaosTheory
Actually the real problem is that DAO took like 5-6 years to make… That kind of scope you will never, ever see again from an EA-controlled company which demands megahits every other year from its minions. Corners simply have to be cut to maintain that schedule, and they were quite apparent in DA2. OR, you hire more people to work on it, but that affects the bottom line, so it's off the table. EA wants game-producing sweat shops throwing quick, lower-quality product together to maximize profits.

I expect DA3 to be more of the same, with a few tweaks.

I don't quite agree. DA:O did take a long time but they didn't have a full team until the last two years or so - prior to that, it was mostly a small team such as writers in pre-production. Yes, they did rush DA2 but there's no reason they couldn't make a decent DA3 if they wanted.

Whether they will is a another matter but, if not, it won't specifically be because they didn't spend 6 years on it.

Originally Posted by Couchpotato
And that is why the older fans like me hate there new style. Look at any other pc orientated company out there they all abandoned what they once were to embrace the console market.

Nothing wrong with it but people like me just don't like there direction there going. Apparently though a few thousand lost sales is nothing to them when new fans salivate over every game they make.

Knowing that the fans nowadays will face the same problem 10 years from now make me giggle with glee. They can one day be ridiculed by the masses for once and told they don't get it. It's a cycle that repeats itself.

As an older gamer myself, I certainly know where you're coming from. In my case, I think I've come to expect Bioware games as cinematic action RPGs and enjoy them solely on that level. It certainly doesn't scratch my itch for new games in the Infinity Engine style, and I'd love to see more turn based RPGs, but I just don't expect them from Bioware.

The games industry is almost starting to mirror the movie industry - big studios make the blockbuster games that appeal to the wide masses, the smaller indie studios focus on niche tastes.

Originally Posted by dpc76
As an older gamer myself, I certainly know where you're coming from. In my case, I think I've come to expect Bioware games as cinematic action RPGs and enjoy them solely on that level. It certainly doesn't scratch my itch for new games in the Infinity Engine style, and I'd love to see more turn based RPGs, but I just don't expect them from Bioware.

The games industry is almost starting to mirror the movie industry - big studios make the blockbuster games that appeal to the wide masses, the smaller indie studios focus on niche tastes.

I know but what surprises me is no one picked up the infinity engine after interplay and black isle abandoned it. It was a good engine for rpgs.

— RPGWatchSenior News Editor & Moderator

"I Am a Proud BioWare Fanboy, and Have Been One for Fifteen Years."Paypal Donation Link - If you like my work please donate.

The first time it happens is before you reach the gnolls. You fight a random encounter of gnolls, think it's done, skeletons pop out of the ground. That repeats a few times.

Waves.

I think you've got definition of "waves" wrong. BG series never had waves combat. As JDR13 pointed out, that was ambush. There are no new enemies continuously spawning at random places for 3-5 minutes.